IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J.
Amazon Distributors (pvt.)(ltd.) – Appellant
Versus
M/s Tourniete Private Limited – Respondent
CM(M) 1379 of 2023 & CM APPL. 43656 of 2023
Decided On : 24-08-2023
Costs - Civil Suit - The court reduced the quantum of costs imposed on the petitioner in a civil suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,56,516 from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 20,000, considering the delay in producing documents due to reliance in another criminal proceeding and the disproportionate nature of the original costs.
Fact of the Case:
The petition impugns the order passed by the Trial Court in a civil suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,56,516, limited to the extent the Trial Court imposed costs of Rs. 50,000 on the Petitioner. The Petitioner was unable to place on record additional documents due to reliance in a criminal complaint filed against the Respondent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found merit in the submission of the Petitioner that the imposition of costs was disproportionate with the claims sought in the plaint. However, considering the fact that the plaintiff sought adjournments, the order of the Trial Court imposing costs was justified. The court deemed it appropriate to reduce the quantum of costs from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 20,000 and directed the Petitioner to deposit the reduced costs with the Legal Aid within a period of two weeks.
Issues: The issues revolved around the imposition of costs in a civil suit and the delay in producing documents due to reliance in another criminal proceeding.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the disproportionate nature of the original costs in relation to the claims sought in the civil suit and the delay in producing documents due to reliance in another criminal proceeding. The court justified the imposition of costs but deemed it appropriate to reduce the quantum of costs to mitigate the hardship caused to the Petitioner.
Final Decision: The court modified the impugned order to reduce the quantum of costs imposed upon the Petitioner from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 20,000 and directed the Petitioner to deposit the reduced costs with the Legal Aid within a period of two weeks.
JUDGMENT
Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 43657/2023 (For Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
CM(M) 1379/2023 & CM APPL. 43656/2023
1. This petition impugns the order dated 07.08.2023 passed by the District Judge (Comm.), South-East District, Saket Courts, Delhi (`Trial Court') in CS (DJ) No. 1329/2018, titled as Amazon Distributors (P.) Ltd. v. M/S Touniete Pvt. Ltd., limited to the extent the Trial Court imposed costs of Rs. 50,000/- on the Petitioner.
2. The Petitioner herein is the original plaintiff and the Respondent is original defendant before the Trial Court.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner was unable to place on record the additional documents as the same were also relied upon in the criminal complaint filed by this Petitioner herein against the Respondent.
3.1. He states that the civil suit itself has been filed for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4,56,516/- and the imposition of the costs of Rs. 50,000/- is onerous and will cause great prejudice to the Petitioner herein
3.2. He states that the Petitioner has already paid the costs of Rs. 20,000/-, in these proceedings which were separately imposed on him by the Trial Court vide order dated 03.07.2023.
3.3. He states that with the filing of these additional documents, all documents on which reliance is placed stand filed. No further documents are required to be filed by the Petitioner.
3.4. He states that the Respondent has been proceeded ex-parte in this matter.
4. This Court has considered the submissions of the counsel for the Petitioner and perused the record.
5. In view of the fact that the suit is for recovery of an amount of Rs. 4,56,516/- and as submitted by the counsel for the Petitioner that the delay in producing the documents occurred due to the fact that the same are being relied upon in another criminal proceedings, this Court find merit in the submission of the Petitioner that the impositions of this costs is disproportionate with the claims sought in the plaint. However, considering the fact that the plaintiff has sought adjournments, the order of the Trial Court imposing costs was justified. However, to mitigate the hardship caused to the Petitioner due to the quantum of the costs, this Court deems it appropriate to reduce the quantum of costs from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs. 20,000/-. The Petitioner is directed to deposit the costs of Rs. 20,000/- with the Legal Aid within a period of two (2) weeks.
6. The submission of the Petitioner that no further adjournment will be sought for filing any further document is taken on record and the Petitioner is bound down to the same.
7. The aforesaid quantum of Rs. 20,000/- is acceptable to the Petitioner.
8. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of. Pending Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
9. It is made clear that the impugned order is only modified to the extent of quantum of costs imposed upon the Petitioner herein.
The court has the discretion to modify the quantum of costs imposed in a civil suit based on the proportionality with the claims sought and the circumstances leading to the delay in producing documen....
A petitioner cannot file a petition after accepting costs paid by the respondent without disclosing this fact, and the Trial Court's exercise of discretion in condoning the delay in filing the applic....
Delay in filing written statements in civil suits may be condoned with reasonable compensatory costs to promote litigation on merits rather than technicalities.
The court affirmed the principle that discretionary orders regarding costs by lower courts should not be interfered with unless shown to be excessive or unjust.
Exemplary costs in writ petitions must be reasonable, based on actual gains and misconduct, and not arbitrary figures.
The court has the discretion to set aside the imposition of costs if it deems them to be onerous, considering the circumstances of the petitioner.
The court has the discretion to modify costs imposed, and expeditious disposal of suits may be requested in consideration of relevant circumstances.
High Court conditionally sets aside trial court costs for adjournments, requiring future compliance to avoid enhancement.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.